|
CHAMBER ORCHESTRA REVIEW
Viktoria Mullova Nicholas McGegan
February 11, 2007
|
Haydn Lessons By Rebekah Ahrendt
The Philharmonia Baroque Orchestra forayed into more traditional symphonic realms last Saturday. Playing in a sold-out First Congregational Church in Berkeley, it featured Beethoven's Violin Concerto and symphonies by Carl Maria von Weber and Joseph Haydn. Guest artist Viktoria Mullova dazzled the audience with her violinistic feats, but even more dazzling were the achievements of the orchestra as a whole.
It was indeed a bit disconcerting to begin the program with Beethoven’s Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 61, especially with so shining a star as Viktoria Mullova, but maestro Nicholas McGegan’s programming choices made perfect sense in the end. Instead of treating Haydn like an appetizer, as most orchestras do, McGegan served him up last, as the main course and dessert in one.
Nicholas McGegan From the moment she appeared, Mullova commanded the stage. Tall and athletic, she cuts a striking figure. She was clearly in a Berkeley mood, wearing open-toed sandals with no socks or stockings. The first movement of Beethoven’s work is built on the double-exposition model favored by composers of that era. That means the soloist is silent for a good long time while the orchestra sets up the tone and structure, and as it introduces the motives that will form the building blocks of the piece. The excellent performers of PBO shone in the orchestral version of the exposition, with kudos going especially to the winds for their beautiful phrasing. At last the orchestra cadenced, and Mullova stepped up. It was worth the wait.
Mullova’s sprightly, glittering sound danced around the hall, filling every corner. Playing a 1723 Stradivarius (with a modern chinrest — a real novelty at a PBO concert) helped, but it was she who made it sing so sweetly. Particularly impressive were the cadenzas. As neither Beethoven nor the violinist who premiered the work in 1806 left cadenzas behind, those in the first and third movements were written by harpsichordist and conductor Ottavio Dantone, who is also Mullova’s favored accompanist for earlier music. A segue from the second to the third movement was written by Mullova herself. All three did exactly what a cadenza should do: capitalize on the particular talents of the performer. For Mullova, that meant utilizing the complete range of the instrument all at once, in fast passagework. But there’s more to her playing than speed. Between the fire of the first movement and the wild dance of the third comes the second movement, a true romanze (like the slow movement of Eine kleine Nachtmusik). This was a perfect vehicle for showcasing Mullova’s lyrical side. Yet more than the others, this movement also perhaps explains why Beethoven only wrote one violin concerto. The orchestra is just so much more interesting than the soloist. At times, the violin solo seems completely unnecessary, merely glitter and fluff above the orchestral heart of the piece. Weber took a different approach to balancing solo and full orchestra in his Symphony No. 2 in C Major, J.51, of 1807, which was written for a court orchestra. A melodist through and through, Weber chose to highlight different soloists in the orchestra throughout the piece, building on the concertante model favored by Haydn in certain of his early court symphonies. Besides the usual solo roles, like the oboe (played beautifully by Marc Schachman), or the graceful fluting of Janet See, or even the bassoon (nobly played by Danny Bond), Weber made some unusual choices. Thus, violist Anthony Martin got to shine in the second movement, while the horns, played by R.J. Kelley and Paul Avril, not only got solos, but also extended duets with real tunes. It was an amazingly inventive piece.
Yet it all goes back to Haydn. That motivic development Beethoven is so famous for? Haydn showed him how to do it. The unusual harmonic dodges? That comes from Haydn, too. The soloistic treatment of the orchestra? Haydn did it memorably. That’s why so many early 19th-century composers still lived in Haydn’s shadow. Perhaps that is the reason the high point of this concert was Haydn’s Symphony 104 in D Major, of 1795, the last of his London symphonies, and the last one he wrote. PBO was in rare form in this performance. Always perfectly tasteful, yet with hints of earthy humor, McGegan and the orchestra played the heck out of this work. Never have I heard ideas so clearly communicated, or such perfect balances. Even more revelatory was the multitude of incarnations in which a simple sigh motif appears throughout this symphony — something I had missed in other performances, but which was blazingly clear in PBO’s traversal. Haydn’s shadow was indeed long. Although No. 104 was his last symphony, it was certainly not the last piece he wrote. To the great frustration of many a young composer, the old man just kept on going. It is interesting to note that Beethoven’s big breakthrough symphony, No. 3, the “Eroica,” wasn’t written until 1803, the same year that Haydn stopped composing for good. This point highlights McGegan’s revealing programming choices. By placing Beethoven and Weber before Haydn in a single concert, the elder master’s influence became clear. McGegan deserves praise for his thoughtfulness and for bringing Viktoria Mullova to Berkeley.
(Rebekah Ahrendt holds the artist's diploma in viola da gamba and historical performance practice from the Royal Conservatory of The Hague. Currently she is a graduate student in historical musicology at UC Berkeley.)
|
